With less than two months remaining before the US presidential election, much attention is focused on the state of the the US economy and the challenges that it will present to the next president.
We are in the midst of a financial crisis caused by the serious mispricing of all kinds of risks and by the collapse of the housing bubble that developed in the first half of this decade. What started as a problem with subprime mortgages has now spread to houses more generally, as well as to other asset classes. The housing problem is contributing to the financial crisis, which in turn is reducing the supply of credit needed to sustain economic activity.
Indeed, the financial crisis has worsened in recent weeks, reflected in the US Federal Reserve’s takeover of quasi-government mortgage lenders Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac — which may cost the US taxpayers hundreds of billions of dollars — as well as the bankruptcy of Lehman Brothers and the sale of Merrill Lynch. Ultimately, these financial failures reflect the downward spiral of house prices and the increasing number of homes with negative equity, i.e., with substantial mortgage debt in excess of market values.
ILLUSTRATION: MOUNTAIN PEOPLE
Negative equity is significant because mortgages in the US are generally “no recourse” loans. If a homeowner defaults, creditors can take the house, but they cannot take other property or income to make up any unpaid balance. Even in those states where mortgages are not “no recourse” loans, creditors generally do not pursue the assets or income of individuals who default.
We cannot be sure about how much further house prices will fall. Experts say another 15 percent decline is required just to return to the pre-bubble price path. But there is nothing to stop the decline from continuing once it reaches that point. The growing gap between mortgage debts and house prices will continue to increase the rate of defaults. Many homeowners who can afford to make their mortgage payments will choose to default, move to rental housing, and wait to purchase until house prices have declined further.
As homeowners with large negative equity default, the foreclosed homes contribute to the excess supply that drives prices down further. And the lower prices lead to more negative equity and therefore to more defaults and foreclosures. It is not clear what will stop this self-reinforcing process.
Declining house prices are key to the financial crisis and the outlook for the economy, because mortgage-backed securities, and the derivatives based on them, are the primary assets that are weakening financial institutions. Until house prices stabilize, these securities cannot be valued with any confidence. And that means that the financial institutions that own them cannot have confidence in the liquidity or solvency of potential counterparties — or even in the value of their own capital. Without this confidence, credit will not flow and economic activity will be constrained.
Moreover, because financial institutions’ assets were bought mainly with borrowed money, the shortage of credit is exacerbated by their need to deleverage. Since raising capital is difficult and costly, they deleverage by lending less.
But the macroeconomic weakness in the US now goes beyond the decreased supply of credit. Falling house prices reduce household wealth and therefore consumer spending. Falling employment lowers wage and salary incomes. The higher prices of food and energy depress real incomes further. And declining economic activity in the rest of the world is lowering demand for US exports.
The US Federal Reserve has, in my judgment, responded appropriately by reducing the federal funds interest rate sharply and creating a variety of new credit facilities. The low interest rate helped by making the dollar more competitive, but otherwise monetary policy appears to have lost traction because of the condition of the housing sector and the dysfunctional state of the credit markets.
The US Congress and the Bush administration enacted a US$100 billion tax rebate in an attempt to stimulate consumer spending. Those of us who supported this policy generally knew that history and economic theory implied that such one-time fiscal transfers have little effect, but we thought that this time might be different. Our support was, in the words of Samuel Johnson, a triumph of hope over experience.
In the end, our hopes were frustrated. The official national income accounting data for the second quarter are now available, and they show that the rebates did very little to stimulate spending. More than 80 percent of the rebate dollars were saved or used to pay down debt. Very little was added to current spending.
So that is where the US is now: in the middle of a financial crisis, with the economy sliding into recession, monetary policy already at maximum easing, and fiscal transfers impotent. That is an unenviable situation, to say the least, for any incoming president.
Martin Feldstein, a professor of economics at Harvard, was formerly chairman of US president Ronald Reagan’s Council of Economic Advisors and president of the National Bureau for Economic Research.
COPYRIGHT: PROJECT SYNDICATE
Two sets of economic data released last week by the Directorate-General of Budget, Accounting and Statistics (DGBAS) have drawn mixed reactions from the public: One on the nation’s economic performance in the first quarter of the year and the other on Taiwan’s household wealth distribution in 2021. GDP growth for the first quarter was faster than expected, at 6.51 percent year-on-year, an acceleration from the previous quarter’s 4.93 percent and higher than the agency’s February estimate of 5.92 percent. It was also the highest growth since the second quarter of 2021, when the economy expanded 8.07 percent, DGBAS data showed. The growth
In the intricate ballet of geopolitics, names signify more than mere identification: They embody history, culture and sovereignty. The recent decision by China to refer to Arunachal Pradesh as “Tsang Nan” or South Tibet, and to rename Tibet as “Xizang,” is a strategic move that extends beyond cartography into the realm of diplomatic signaling. This op-ed explores the implications of these actions and India’s potential response. Names are potent symbols in international relations, encapsulating the essence of a nation’s stance on territorial disputes. China’s choice to rename regions within Indian territory is not merely a linguistic exercise, but a symbolic assertion
More than seven months into the armed conflict in Gaza, the International Court of Justice ordered Israel to take “immediate and effective measures” to protect Palestinians in Gaza from the risk of genocide following a case brought by South Africa regarding Israel’s breaches of the 1948 Genocide Convention. The international community, including Amnesty International, called for an immediate ceasefire by all parties to prevent further loss of civilian lives and to ensure access to life-saving aid. Several protests have been organized around the world, including at the University of California Los Angeles (UCLA) and many other universities in the US.
In the 2022 book Danger Zone: The Coming Conflict with China, academics Hal Brands and Michael Beckley warned, against conventional wisdom, that it was not a rising China that the US and its allies had to fear, but a declining China. This is because “peaking powers” — nations at the peak of their relative power and staring over the precipice of decline — are particularly dangerous, as they might believe they only have a narrow window of opportunity to grab what they can before decline sets in, they said. The tailwinds that propelled China’s spectacular economic rise over the past